Agreement or confrontation on the table

Shargh has examined the new round of nuclear negotiations, arguing that Europe is once again set to become the intersection of diplomacy and hard power. These discussions are unfolding at a moment when the atmosphere is more infused than ever with military threats, amassing of U.S. military forces in the region, and increasingly sharp rhetoric from the White House.

The fateful dilemma of Iran’s economy

TEHRAN- Etemad addressed the tense conditions of Iran’s economy in an article in the current context. According to the newspaper, we are welcoming a new round of negotiations between Tehran and Washington while Iranian markets are at the peak of their historic fervor.

TEHRAN PAPERS:

Why is the space ready for a new agreement?

TEHRAN- In a reference to recent developments, reformist political activist Ali Bagheri told Etemad: The public atmosphere in the country and also international reactions show that the prevailing perception of a war atmosphere has given way to hope for diplomacy. A series of unofficial news reports from inside and outside the country indicate that the horizon of negotiations has become brighter than in comparison to the past, and this issue has noticeably changed the psychological atmosphere prevailing in the country and the region.

From the war of the century to the deal of the century

Etemad, in an analytical piece, examined Donald Trump’s current strategy. Trump wants to stand at the edge of the cliff as the deal-maker of the century, but Tehran has reminded him that in the Middle East, the price of any deal is set by blood and oil, not by tweets and tariffs. The international system is experiencing a kind of guided entropy: a moment in which Iran, by leveraging Russia and China as well as its deep regional influence, places the United States in a strategic dead end.

TEHRAN PAPERS:

The threat facing European security

Hamshahri analyzed the European Union’s move to designate Iran’s Islamic Revolution Guard Corps (IRGC) as a terrorist organization. According to the paper, this hostile action by the EU is viewed by experts as a dangerous precedent inspired by Washington and Tel Aviv, and a clear violation of the principles governing international law.

US officials' disagreement over military attack on Iran

TEHRAN- Shargh wrote: U.S. media are reporting serious disagreements within the Trump administration regarding a military attack on Iran; a disagreement between hardline groups that emphasize the implementation of the red line and a group centered on J.D. Vance and Steve Witkoff, who believe that the costs of the war will not bring any tangible gains for the United States. However, some American officials admit that without further strengthening U.S. combat capabilities, it will be difficult to manage Iran’s possible response.

The extensive US military buildup around Iran

TEHRAN- Hamshahri discussed the extensive U.S. military buildup around Iran. According to the newspaper, relations between Iran and the U.S. are at one of their most sensitive and tense points in recent years. The extensive U.S. military deployment around Iran, from aircraft carriers and fighter jets to defense systems, is arranged in a way that makes this threat appear completely real and operational from a military perspective.

TEHRAN PAPERS:

Seeking a third way in Iran-IAEA relations

Arman-e-Melli examined the current situation between Iran and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in an analysis by former diplomat Hassan Beheshtipour. According to Beheshtipour, in such circumstances where there is a difference of opinion between Iran and the Agency, we must think of a new way. We must set up a new framework for cooperation between Iran and the Agency.

Battle over social cohesion and national decision-making capacity

Khorasan, in an analysis of the enemy’s approach toward Iran, wrote: In the literature of Iran’s foreign policy, an old warning has always been repeated: “The West wants to turn Iran into Syria.” Critics and opposition groups put forward the narrative that if the United States attacks the Islamic Republic, the country will turn into a developed Japan. Today, field evidence and the implicit admissions of Western officials have seriously challenged this duality.